Bilam the seer. Who was he?
He appears in our Torah as a seer who articulated God’s blessing for Israel.
He appears in a Canaanite wall inscription at Deir ‘Allah in Jordan as a seer who had a vision of an impending drought, and showed the people how to avert disaster through worship.
He appears in Christian mythology as the founder of the Magi, the religious order that sent three representatives to visit the baby Jesus.
Because some Greek writers thought that Zoroaster founded the Magi, some Christian traditions also identify Bilam with Zoroaster, calling Zoroaster a re-incarnation of Bilam.
Does this mean that Bilam really lived? I don’t know.
But it does mean that he really inspired people – all around the ancient Mediterranean region.
Have Jews been comfortable sharing a prophet with other nations? Yes – and No. There are negative Bilam traditions, and positive Bilam traditions.
The negative traditions speak against religious universalism. According to these traditions, Bilam the universalist is a flake and a fake. Take, for example, one way that Bilam’s name has been interpreted. Some that the name “bil’am” – bet, lamed, ayin, mem – can be read “bli-am,” without a country. Bilam, they say, is a man without a country – in the worst possible way. He is a man without loyalty, without commitment, a prophet for hire by whoever can pay, a phony spiritual leader who teaches whatever will bring in the money.
On the other hand, “bli-am” can also be read as a compliment. Perhaps Bilam’s significant allegiances are not political, but spiritual. Perhaps he has a relationship with God that is direct, and not mediated through any national religion. Perhaps he carries a message so powerful that it is recognized by many nations.
Both the negative and positive of these traditions are found in the Torah narrative itself.
On the positive side, we have the story of Bilam getting hired by King Balak. Bilam asserts that he can only follow God’s guidance. He speaks directly with God, and is told by God that he can go with Balak’s messengers.
On the negative side, we have the story of Bilam’s departure the next morning. Here, God is angry with Bilam for going. Bilam is so estranged from God that Bilam’s donkey can see angels better than Bilam can.
These absolutely contradictory stories sit side by side in the Torah: the international prophet ridiculed, and the international prophet is elevated.
But perhaps the controversy surrounding Bilam is not really about his international recognition. Perhaps it’s not about universalism versus particularism. After all, there is another international prophet of whom the Torah speaks well.
In our Torah, he liberates a nation with divine support, and creates the spiritual and political foundations of a nation.
Christians also credit him with transmitting the much-loved Ten Commandments.
Classical Greek writers saw him as the most accomplished magician of the ancient world.
Islam recognizes him as a prophet.
Universalist Hindus recognize him as an avatar, or manifestation of divinity on earth sent to answer a human cry for help.
Interestingly, there is a midrash that compares Bilam and Moshe – and concludes that Bilam was the greater of the two international prophets, having the more intimate relationship with God. The midrash teaches:
“There were three features possessed by the prophecy of Bilam that were absent from that of Moshe:
(1) Moshe did not know who was speaking with him, whereas Bilam knew who was speaking with him.
(2) Moshe did not know when the Blessed Holy One He would speak with him, whereas Bilam knew.
(3) Bilam spoke with God whenever he pleased, for it says, ‘prostrate but with eyes unveiled’ which signifies that he used to prostrate himself on his face and straightaway his eyes were unveiled to anything he inquired about. Moshe, however, did not speak with God whenever he wished.”
Let’s go back over those comparisons and see where they come from:
(1) Moshe did not know who was speaking with him, whereas Bilam knew who was speaking with him.
If you remember, when God first called to Moshe from the burning bush, Moshe asked, “Whom shall I say sent me?” but Bilam simply responds to God as if they converse all the time.
(2) Moshe did not know when the Blessed Holy One He would speak with him, whereas Bilam knew.
In the life of Moshe, God calls to Moshe, speaks to Moshe or sometimes simply appears. Bilam says to Balak’s messengers, “Spend the night here, when God speaks to me, I will be able to give you an answer.” And that night, God appears to Bilam.
(3) Bilam spoke with God whenever he pleased, for it says, ‘prostrate but with eyes unveiled’ which signifies that he used to prostrate himself on his face and straightaway his eyes were unveiled to anything he inquired about. Moshe, however, did not speak with God whenever he wished.
Moshe usually spoke with God when God initiated the conversation; when Moshe was upset, he fell on his face, but his eyes were not thereby unveiled.
The Torah gives us many clues about Bilam’s spiritual development. One source is in the way Bilam downloads the four oracles he delivers.
For the first oracle, God manifests to Bilam and puts a word in Bilam’s mouth.
For the second oracle, the same thing happens again: God manifests to Bilam and puts a word in Bilam’s mouth.
For the third oracle, Bilam sees what God wants him to do, abandons his usual practice of looking for omens, and the spirit of God comes upon him.
For the fourth oracle, Bilam simply prophesies.
Here lies another difference between Bilam and Moshe. Moshe remains on the level that Bilam reaches in his first two oracles: God speaks to Moshe, and Moshe then speaks to his audience. Moshe does not learn to discern the will of God on his own, and never does he have the authority to speak words of prophecy that come from his own consciousness. Moshe certainly has God’s ear, and can change God’s mind, and then declare the changes in God’s will. But he is essentially separate from God, a very human mediator and channel.
Somehow Bilam’s abilities make him a better universal prophet.
In the Ten Commandments, Moshe teaches that we should avoid representations of God that reduce God to a picture of something familiar in our world. Bilam doesn’t teach this; he demonstrates it. Bilam manages to let go of all particularistic representations of God. After a time, he no longer needs words. Thus he doesn’t need a particular sacred language, he doesn’t need particular metaphors or symbols, he doesn’t need familiar prayers. Instead, he internalizes the will of God. He doesn’t have to look for omens or special signs. The spirit of God is within him. He simply begins to see the world through God’s eyes. Thus, when he speaks, his words are prescient, wise, and holy.
Perhaps the issue is not who is a greater prophet – perhaps Moshe and Bilam are quite different in their work.
Bilam’s teaching is different from Moshe’s teaching. Moshe teaches that our tradition is an anchor; Bilam teaches that it is a stepping stone. Moshe teaches us to treat those who are different from ourselves as justly as we treat those who are similar; Bilam teaches that these differences are illusions. Moshe reminds us of the “signs and wonders” that are the mark of God acting in the universe; Bilam sees God everywhere. Moshe is responsible for leading and inspiring a particular people; Bilam travels around speaking with whatever people need his help.
So I leave you with two related questions: In what way might Bilam be a hero of Torah? And what can we learn from his level of spiritual development?
— Laura Duhan Kaplan, 2006
Image: Deir Allah Inscription, cojs.org